Bruno Haible <br...@clisp.org> writes: > Simon Josefsson wrote: >> The problem with this approach is that people will have only negative >> information to decide when it would make sense to use a >> gnulib-replacement module for a function, to deal with the platform that >> doesn't yet implement it. >> >> Personally, I think that if glibc, Mac OS X, cygwin and maybe Solaris >> supported some interface I may want to start rely on it as a maintainer, >> if I can get a replacement function into gnulib. But if only glibc >> supports an API, and there is no strong compelling reason to use it, I >> may prefer to use POSIX interfaces instead. > > The question "which platforms support a given interface?" is, I think, best > answered by the symbols x platforms matrix that I'm maintaining at > http://www.haible.de/bruno/gnu/various-symlists.tar.gz
Ah, that is probably more reliable. How do I best generate the lists? I have a ppc Mac OS X 10.4 laptop so I could generate lists for it. > Feel free to provide updates to me; also feel free to provide a other > interfaces to it (such as automatically generated .texi docs) if you want. > > So, I agree with you that this info is important for some decisions people > want to make. But OTOH I find that it is out of scope for gnulib, because > gnulib's target API is POSIX and glibc, not Solaris and not FreeBSD. I now agree. /Simon
